beautifulanddamned

2 minutes ago, MillionsOfSpiders said:

I also wonder what Izzys mother must've thought of all that, I know his dad was long gone before he went out to LA, but where's his mum in all of this. I'm not damning her anything here but if it were my child who left home that young I'd track them down 

It was a very different time, though. Remember Izzy didn't have a permanent address or even a phone- he said he just used payphones. There was no internet. It wouldn't have been easy to track him down. And he always seemed to respect his mom. I bet he called her occasionally and made it seem like everything was fine- she wouldn't have known any better. 

Slash said that Izzy's dad came and got him when he bottomed out on drugs and Izzy said that he detoxed at his mom's house.  

I think he came from a pretty average family- the divorce might have hurt, but lots of kids have divorced parents. Izzy just seemed to lose his damn mind in the environment he found himself in when he got to LA. 

4 minutes ago, ohmygod said:

This was the most significant thing I got from this article. Chris was involved with GNR throughout 2015 and early 2016 based on his Coachella posts and whatnot. Then early March he posts that nonsense about GNR being nostalgia... So the dude must have been fired sometime in February 2016.... I really wonder what he did.

About the same time Izzy started acting out on Twitter. My guess is mid- February 2016 the financials started to be worked out for everyone who wasn't Axl Slash and Duff.  Probably when they all discovered they would be making pretty much the same amount of money they made pre-2016. Some accepted it, some didn't.

I love that Izzy seems to be a big quirky weirdo. That might be the thing that draws me to him the most. He is who he is. 

He strikes me as a guy who is into exploring other cultures and God knows, New Orleans is fascinating in that way (and yes, Voodoo is a part of that culture). If any of you ever visit there is a Voodoo museum that is very interesting and informative - they give tours and offer, uh, "spiritual services." A lot of what that entails has been wildly misconstrued into a "black magic" kind of thing. Obviously, we don't know what Niven and Izzy were doing, but they probably weren't shoving pins into a Voodoo doll dressed up in a bandana and tighty whities. Probably. I mean, anything's possible.

New Orleans is great. It's almost more like a Carribean city than a US city, and Izzy actually moved to the Carribean for a while, didn't he?

Niven managed the Ju Ju Hounds, right? Izzy has probably been asked a million times why he walked out of GNR, has anyone ever asked him why he walked out of the Ju Ju Hounds like he did?

12 minutes ago, stella said:

That's a really good observation. I was trying to get at the fact that being a dealer meant that he had associations with a very shady, dangerous element, but you have really expanded on that. And of course dealing heroin is a criminal act in itself. Add in Desi, and...yeah. that does have repercussions. It's an excellent point that Izzy's history of evasiveness may be a matter of self-preservation and not wanting to incriminate himself.

 

This thread goes a little bit further into Izzy's mindset as well:

Quote

 

It's interesting that Beta told Marc that Izzy was upset with the drug stories in Slash's book. It would be impossible for any member of this band to write an autobiography that didn't talk about their substance abuse. It had such an impact on their experiences and the band's image. And I don't remember any drug stories in Slash's book being overly accusatory or anything. The sex with the same girl story was more embarrassing then any of the drug stories.  

Anyway, how stupid was Marc to bring up the fact that Desi and Pamela would be there on the same day as Izzy?! Jesus, man. It's the ultimate . You haul that out on someone you know to be skittish about the past?

23 minutes ago, Tori72 said:

Interesting stuff. Not sure whether the traveling stuff is due to Izzys paranoia. Sounds possible enough though. I never knew that Desi was underage. From the photos I saw of her I never would have guessed. Do you remember where you read she was underage?

It's in Reckless Road in the Cast of Characters preamble. 

"Her relationship and affiliation with the band ended when they signed with Geffen Records; she was underage and they wanted to avoid potential legal liabilities."  

It's on page 6.

Caveat with this book though- almost all of these people are unreliable narrators.  

9 hours ago, downliner said:

Nice find!

Does anyone here have the album "Winterblossom is Dead" by Kittyviolet? Izzy is a guest on two songs on that album but I've not been able to track down a copy. Seems to have been pulled from iTunes in the UK Anyone know if it can still be purchased on iTunes in other countries? Thanks

It's not on iTunes in the U.S. either. It's JT Longoria's band, right? Is he on social media? @SerenityScorp !

2 hours ago, ludurigan said:

good news on izzy

 

Great! Is this from a recent session or an old session, I wonder?

2 hours ago, Kris_1989 said:

Where's @beautifulanddamned when we need her? She needs to knock some sense into us quick.

I think a small, dignified amount of hope might be in order.

9 hours ago, Kris_1989 said:

I understand where you're coming from but I have to disagree. (Sorry! )

You don't have to apologize, I am enjoying an interesting discussion! 

10 hours ago, Kris_1989 said:

In the early 90's Izzy had plenty of opportunities to join bands that were close to GNR's size - even Aerosmith was rumored - but he turned them down to do the Juju Hounds. Which I'm sure didn't bring in a lot of dough. They probably only broke even in the end. Later on there's VR, he was there before Dave Kushner and could of easily been a founding member of that band. Everyone knew VR was going to make a buttload of cash because of the lineup but he still walked away from it all

I would love to read about all the established bands that Izzy was invited to join and turned down. I have never read that.  And no I don't think that Izzy has ever been involved in any other music project to make money. He makes his money solely from GNR. That was my point.  And again let me reiterate that I'm not suggesting that Izzy is especially money hungry (obviously the guy lives modestly in comparison to say, Axl). I'm just trying to contradict this idea that, "Izzy isn't in it for the money."  Especially when Izzy himself has said that, you know, he'd be in it for the money.  

10 hours ago, Kris_1989 said:

Also, his divorce (I think?) was in 2000 or 2001?

The 5 year gap between the divorce and his appearances was kind of what I was talking about. Several years of lawyers fees and alimony payments will deplete the old bank account, but this is coming from the daughter of a divorce lawyer, so I am a bit over sensitive to that topic. Divorce is expensive, even for people with little money. Some people stayed married because they can't afford to get divorced. And Izzy isn't Slash. Izzy has essentially been retired for 25 years- except for his royalty checks. A little bounce couldn't have hurt. Money is relative. Everyone has a line they like to float above.

10 hours ago, Kris_1989 said:

Plus, wouldn't you want a hefty fee to appear on a stage with this lot? I know I would. Can't blame him for that

You can apologize to me for posting that, come on.

10 hours ago, Kris_1989 said:

I don't doubt that Izzy cares about the money to an extent but I don't think it's any more so than an average person. If anything I think he was aware that GNR was an easy target for leeches and wanted to make sure his ducks were in a row before he got ripped off. Pretty smart of him to keep an eye on it actually, the amount of musicians that got screwed by their management/record labels in the 80s is insane.

I agree. 

10 hours ago, Kris_1989 said:

On top of that... even right now at 55, with the right management, Izzy could do well on his own or join another band. 55 isn't that old you guys, some of you act like he's got one foot in the grave already. Izzy's still got a good chunk of his life ahead of him. Look at the Stones & Paul McCartney, they're in their 70s and still killing it and having a blast.

55 isn't that old, and Izzy'smusic is wonderful, but his money making years are behind him...unless he joins his old band or another band of equal caliber. Slash, Duff and Axl realized this about their solo outfits too, hence the reuinion. And all three of them have much higher profiles. Ten years ago, Izzy was shopping his stuff around- he talked about giving his tapes to John Kalodner who didn't hear any hits. Rock n' Roll barely sells now, and up and coming bands... it's a young man's game. And 55 isn't that young either.

9 hours ago, Archtop said:

Yes and this is exactly where we lose Izzy in my opinon, I get the impression he wants to talk to his old band mates across a table, thrash out how to do a reunion, split the profits and then take it to the managers and lawyers and let them sort out all the legal shit. All we have learnt so far regarding reunion negotiations is that there were non, it was decided by Axl, Slash and Duff. It was later Izzy and Steven were approached, there may have been rumblings but why hire a legal team and management until it's really looks likley to go ahead and he is invited to join? Who knows if he had representation or not, but I bet when they spoke to Izzy, they had already lost him and not even the money could bring him on board.

If that's true it would just be so adorably naive. Izzy has had 30+ years of history with these guys. They have always been a mess. He knows that better than anyone. That he would think that putting Slash and Axl ( and Adler! ADLER!) across the table from each other and saying, "okay what are your demands?" is just... I can't believe anyone in their right minds would have thought that would go well. Least of all, Izzy. I also find it hard to believe that Izzy, who still gets royalties from GNR INC, who talks to Axl and Slash and was in the studio with Duff several times in 2015- the last being in December of 2015 weeks before Coachella was announced, just didn't know about the reunion. Why get representation? Because it's the responsible thing to do if you want to be involved with something like this. Not even the money could bring him on board? According to his own words in his own tweet, money could have brought him on board.

9 hours ago, Archtop said:

Integrity to me means, standing up for what you believe in and staying true to ones self, I think Izzy was not happy with an offer he was made so he stayed true to what he believed, by not getting involved. The tour is a cash grab as most tours are, you point out that this the only way muscians can really make money these days, Axl, Slash and Duff are here to make money and I don't begrudge them that at all,  I also would not begrudge Izzy or see him as a putz if he did decide to join them, I would assume he negotiated terms that work for him.

Well put.

9 hours ago, Archtop said:

I get that this post makes me somewhat look like an Izzy nutswinger?

Yes, yes you are a nutswinger. And I love that about you.

4 hours ago, BorderlineCrazy said:

Adding to this cool discussion about Izzy's motivations, I'd like to say we shouldn't forget Steven's comments. He said Izzy "wants to do it the right way or not at all". Everyone's free to interpret what that means but to me that has a way deeper meaning than just money. In my opinion, Izzy wanted the band to be functional again, he wanted to get AFD5 back, tour and write new music (and also have the money split in a fair way to his eyes). If Axl wanted to keep Frank, Richard and Dizzy, add Melissa and tour endlessly without writing a new song (and play CD stuff), it doesn't seem that hard to imagine Izzy not being int

Couldn't Izzy himself have Tweeted "I wanted to do it a different way?" Or, "I would have been in it if it had been the classic 5?" He didn't. He brought up the money. 

I respect your opinion, of course, and we can agree to disagree.  

It honestly doesn't really matter, it just think it's weird that anyone would rather not see Izzy appear than appear and give up on his principles. Principles he never said he held in the first place.  Or that someone just wouldn't go see a show in some kind of protest for Izzy. I view it as simply getting involved in the business decisions of a bunch of millionaires who could give a shit about us.  

It's interesting. One of the reasons people seem to feel so passionately about Izzy is that, since we know so little about him, we can fill in the blanks how we see fit.  Everyone does it.  Remember at the beginning of the avocado incident when people were literally saying, "this cannot be Izzy, Izzy is much cooler than this!" I'm sure he is cool- but he was also a man in his 50's trying to master social media for the first time. But people could not believe it.  Legend before the man.

1 hour ago, Darkenchantress said:

Absolutely. I've been saying this since day one after the "loot tweet". For Izzy is more about recognition than money. That's what Tracii Guns meant too when he posted his message about Izzy "staying true to himself". He didn't put up with that shit in '91 and he isn't going to do it now and I love him for that. But well, people take it literally and don't even try to read between the lines when all the facts seem to indicate that there's more to it than just money.

 I would disagree with that. I honestly think that for Izzy, GNR has primarily been about the money for a long time. Maybe since the beginning. He did an interview once where he said he would get high in the late 80's and go through paperwork and call the lawyers asking about the money and where it was going. For all their interviews, you never heard the other guys saying stuff like that. He told Marc Cantor that he wanted old footage to make simple videos because the videos Axl planned cost too much money. People say "but he quit at the height of GNR" but that isn't quite true. You made money off albums in those days and the UYI's were already done and ready to come out. His residuals were safe. The UYI tour was hemorrhaging money from extravagance and lawsuits and fines- they had to do the Skin and Bones tour just to break even. Izzy has said the final straw for him was Axl wanting to reduce his pay because he didn't move around enough. He said he only came back to do those shows in 1993 for a salary. Slash and Duff seemed unlikely to survive in those years and Axl was at risk of losing his damn mind. Izzy could see the writing on the wall with the band and got his lawyer to make a deal where he was paid a portion of GNR profits through 1997- probably knowing that the band was unlikely to last that long anyway. And he was right. Axl said he asked for and got a large amount of money to come back and do shows in 2006. I have no doubt that we saw him as much as we did in 2006 for one reason- Izzy did something a few years earlier that is often wildly expensive for a man. He got divorced. Then there was the Loot tweet in 2016. Having equal say in how things are done now doesn't mean going into the clubhouse with the other guys to make some decisions- it means hiring managers and lawyers to meet with everybody else's managers and lawyers so that they can hammer out a plan. That's the biggest sign for me that Izzy never had any intention of getting overly involved with this thing. He probably knew about it since at least 2014, and never made a move to hire managent to get involved in the proceedings. 

There's nothing wrong with wanting to be paid well for your work. Izzy's solo music is basically hobby music that he is kind enough to share with fans. He makes his money off GNR and always has. I understand where everyone is coming from, I love the guy too, but I would just hesitate to say that Izzy is too full of integrity to get involved with this and that all he wants is respect etc because then, when and if he does get on that stage with them, he looks like a putz. That leads to people saying things like, "I hope he doesn't do an appearance, that he holds true to himself." Which is just ridiculous. Then we are holding him to a standard he didn't create for himself. If he shows up we should say "Yay! I hope he was paid wild amounts of money for this! God knows, there's plenty to go around!"

I feel terrible even writing this and that's dumb. Izzy doesn't make money from his solo music  (or a very, very nominal amount). He doesn't write books or tour or do reality shows (thank god). He's not endorsing products. GNR is his livelihood.  And that's okay. Doesn't make him any less cool.

29 minutes ago, Kris_1989 said:

This is totally off topic but am I the only one that can picture Izzy doing this?

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/20/sports/its-a-nice-night-for-surfing.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=0

Surfers are nuts.

I wonder if he even still surfs?

The @ArtTavana article said something about him surfing, I think. Impressive if true. I would imagine it would be awfully hard on a 55 year old body.  

The newspaper ad's adorable, I bet it's from his Momma.

Alice!

"Special Guest" Heh.  Oh, Bon Jovi.

15 hours ago, mikeman5150 said:

Yes, I know the illusion tour was better for sure, I was just trying to gain perspective of what it was like then vs. now in terms of excitement, popularity, and attendance. I was still pretty young during the illusion tours. I remember them being on MTV and stuff, but I also remember the grunge scene and the yo MTV raps bullshit. Just wondering what it was like for some of the older members here who went to the shows. Was it advertised on radio, tv, billboards? I heard a lot of people this past summer saying not in this lifetime was like an extension of the illusions, that's why I asked the question the way I did. 

I don't even know how to describe this adequately but it's like there are levels of buzz. A buzz from the top- media/MTV/radio created, a buzz from the middle which is where the internet lives, and a buzz from the bottom- local buzz, what your friends and neighbors or coworkers or school mates are talking about. 

Back then the top level was wildly different. MTV and radio stations still had massive amounts of power. Even if you thought MTV was lame you still watched it as a young person because there were very few outlets that catered to youth culture then. And MTV loved GNR. The videos (at least the first two) were huge. I remember the VJ's saying things like "We'll be playing November Rain at the top of the hour. Hold on- we'll be playing November Rain in ten minutes." The only other artists they did that with were Michael Jackson and Madonna. They were fixtures on MTV News because shit was always going down on that tour. CNN covered them in the aftermath of the riots. They just loomed very large in popular culture. They were played all the time on the radio and people actually listened to the radio. The band now has little to no impact on pop culture, so that's different.

The middle level was virtually non-exsistant. There were internet groups in 1992 and 1993, and they were global, but exceedingly small (you can still find some posts on Google Groups from back then). There was no impact from this level of buzz. 

The bottom, local level was greatly affected by the top. Media was much more homogenized back then so people had a tendency to watch and listen to the same things. MTV played "Don't Cry" for the first time and the next day at school everyone was talking about it, whether they were fans or not. Just like you would watch Cheers on TV and the next day everyone would be talking about it because virtually everyone was watching the same damn show at the same damn time. The coverage of the riots and Axl's behavior also had a huge impact because I remember there were kids who didn't even like the band but were going just to see if Axl would lose his shit. If there was a riot, everyone wanted to be there for it because people are weird. 

Maybe I'm imagining this but it seems like there is so much more to do these days. Maybe it's because that's how musicians make money now, but it seems like there is some major event virtually every week and that didn't seem to be the case back then. I grew up in a good sized city, but back then it was a big deal when there was a big concert. Even the act of lining up for tickets was an event in and of itself- sitting on the sidewalk for hours, people bringing lawn chairs, you'd get to meet other fans, the local news would oftentimes make an appearance. The shows were announced on the radio and the local news and ticket prices were much, much more reasonable which made these things much more inclusive and more like community events. It seems like half my school went to this show and I bet a lot of us bought our own tickets with baby-sitting money or money made at a fast food joint or a store in the mall.  The show was also advertised in the local music stores, where young people tended to congregate. 

The only real similarity I see with the NITL tour are the core line-up of Slash/Axl/Duff and attendance numbers.  This tour has more in common with say, a current Rolling Stones tour. Everyone's a little bit older, a little bit more dignified and there is more money involved for both the band and the audience. It's just a great chance to enjoy some classic music from our youth.

Now I feel a hundred years old.

2 hours ago, Archtop said:

Why is it those alt nation articles always start with a click bait heading and end in some completely different irrelevant place. For instance what's the Ron thing got to do with the Spotify logo?

I actually approve of them not using the classic line up imagery and feel they should have done this near the beginning of the regrouping or at least for the tour. That's not to denie Izzy or Steven their place but I think it would have sent a clearer message who is currently in the band. 

 

 

 

Yep. Considering all the lineup changes in this band over the years, it's better to just have a general graphic logo.  And they should have just come out at the beginning of the tour and announced the full lineup. They didn't have to do an interview, just a statement: this is the current lineup, here are our bios, we look forward to seeing you, etc. This band is so weird with stuff like that. Transparency would go a long way with a lot of their fans, and curb (not stop) some of the negative speculation. 

It's like communicating with fans or having a worthwhile fan club. They wouldn't gain much from it.  They make enough bank from regular shows without the hassle. They would get some press over it but they have proven they don't need press.  

It would be a lovely way to honor their history, their fans, Izzy and Steven. No more no less. It would be nice. A nice gesture.  So I don't expect it and won't be disappointed when it doesn't happen.   

5 hours ago, Archtop said:

I want clarification on it all, I think that would shut a lot of the bitching about Izzy up. The most likely reason nobody has come forward from the GnR camp and done that is because it won't look good on them. So what does that say about the "big three"?

I'm tired of the argument 'you wanted Slash back, now his back your bitching about Izzy, your never pleased'. But did anyone suppose Izzy wouldn't be there if Slash and Axl reconciled? It was not part of the scenario, Izzy played with everyone, he was the least likely member to not be in a reunion, he even said he would love to do it. So yeah I have every right to bitch now and not except this as a reunion, it's not my happy ending.

The whole tour has damaged my perception of Duff one hell of a lot, he appears to put on a display of the peace keeper, a reasonable solid family man. His book bangs on about him finding wisdom in life 'it's a good day to die'  blah blah, but his coming across as a player, he knows how to make the best of an opportunity, clever, admirable even, but not seemingly at the expense of the people who had your back along the way.

You spoke very well to the surprise of Izzy not being involved at all. It did feel kind of shocking didn't it? I haven't really thought about that.

The rest of it feels like the 5 stages of grief where you land finally on acceptance. And, for me at least, acceptance means viewing GNR as just a business. When you view it within that parameter, everything makes sense. Duff, frankly, was always the least essential musically to the classic lineup. His songwriting skills are poor to mediocre and there is nothing special about his bass tone. But Duff is the best businessman in the group. He was smart enough to barnacle himself to Slash's ass and has worked hard to create a certain smart ,good guy ,family man image of himself. It's an image though, one he has used to sell himself to the public. And it worked. Good on him, I guess. 

I'm not a romantic person in any sense of the word, so I don't know why I held on to my romantic delusions with this dumb band. They aren't friends or even band mates so much as long term, sometimes friendly business partners.  Slash, Duff, their managers and Team Brazil have clearly done everything imaginable to get Axl onstage on time every night. Not poking the bear is what keeps the money rolling in- every safety net imaginable has been put in place, and that includes not talking to anyone. If clarification is going to come, it probably has to come from Izzy.

But you gotta view him through this lens too. I don't really believe that Izzy was holding out for Steven or some "band of brothers" scenario. He wanted more loot. And that's fine. It really is. I hope it works out for him and they pay him half a million to guest at six shows, or do one killer Appetite performance. There's no reason why Izzy shouldn't be making (a relative amount of) bank on this thing like everyone else.  And honestly it seems like he would prefer a one-off kind of thing where he made a lot of money.  

Don't come to the dark side with me though, it sucks here.  Close your eyes and pretend that we might see a big-boy version of this:

(and don't think of how much they would have to be paid to take a picture together.)

5 hours ago, Darkenchantress said:

Don't get me wrong. I'm pretty content with Izzy being happy and healthy as he said, and doing his own thing. I just hate when people make absurd assumptions about him like "he doesn't like touring", "he isn't reliable", "he can't play guitar", "he has no stage presence", "he adds nothing to the band". Seriously, but you are begging to have him in the studio. I don't think at this point in time anyone can hold a grudge against Izzy for leaving GnR, both Slash and Duff have said they totally understood Izzy once they got sober. He didn't bail or didn't show up to a show, nor was he late either. Yeah, he left the Jujus and we actually don't know what happened. Rick is still playing with him after all this years so I suppose nothing on bad terms. Whatever, maybe he left because he got tired, maybe he felt the call of the avocado farming and one does not simply ignores the call of avocado farming. 

Jokes aside, I think Izzy is unfairly treated by most of this fandom and it gets me on my nerves. Whatever, I don't have the strength to fight people anymore... well, who am I kidding? One day,  I will probably rise from my deathbed and scream: "IT WAS IZZY'S FUCKING BAND!". 

I think what it comes down to, is that for the majority of GNR fandom, Slash and Axl are GNR. If one thing has really surprised me in the last year, that's it. I knew casuals only cared about those two, but that the majority of diehards do too has shocked the hell out of me. It's Slash and Axl and everybody else can fuck off. That opinion is completely valid, if that's who the band is to someone that's absolutely fine. But de-legitimizing other members seems to be one of the main ways to defend that stance, which is why we see it so much. And that sucks. I know I have done that to S/D/A in my frustration with this whole thing. It's just very agitating when that faction is coming at you from a place of getting everything they ever fucking wanted. 

It would be nice if a few of those people would just say, "Slash and Axl is where it's at for me and I'm thrilled with the current band but I acknowledge that if the Appetite 5 (or whoever) is GNR to you, this is probably wildly disappointing." Instead it becomes, "You people are never fucking happy!" And then everything devolves into a circle jerk of terribleness.

I have no problem with nostalgia, nostalgia can be a blast. I'm as sick of SCOM as anyone, Axl sounds horrible on it, but it was my favorite moment in the show by far because of the crowd. People just losing their damn minds. Collective joy. The band sounded tight. I liked it. I don't regret going. I wish I could just stand back and enjoy this as a casual fan, like I wish I could go back and experience Christmas as a kid again. 

This last year as a whole feels like this: Someone has said to Axl, "It's just Slash and Duff. Look, the managers and lawyers will do all the talking, just get your ass onstage on time. You don't have to look at them or talk to them or rehearse with them. You don't have to make new music or do interviews. We'll use the same stage set up and setlist- you don't have to do anything but take the stage and smile at Slash once or twice and we'll give you a million dollars a night." And he did it. And good on him, I mean that sincerely. For someone like Axl, that's a sacrifice. It was great to see A/S/D onstage together. But that rigidness has affected the way the performances and tour actually feel, IMO.

Almost all successful bands kind of hate each other as they get older, Aerosmith and the Stones being just two examples- but they still manage to make business and band decisions and music together and that comes across in their performances and interviews. I'm not a huge AC/DC fan, but I enjoyed that show because against all odds, they actually felt like a band. GNR feels like a machine. Maybe that will change as they get more comfortable with each other- it's still early in the game.  But add Izzy and Steven, get them in a recording studio together, make them rehearse new songs. Take away all the safeguards and what you will have is a volatile Axl. Will anyone risk the $$$ for that? 

Mostly, I'm disappointed in my own expectations because I should have expected exactly this really. The writing was on the wall from the beginning.  I'm going to go forward expecting the status quo and it will be a lovely surprise if we get anything beyond that.

2 hours ago, MillionsOfSpiders said:

Yes, it really happened  

They were in front of the barrier, not all the way along but enough to block many people's view. They weren't interested in the show, they were just busy partying in front of everybody and we were trying to see over them. To be honest I was more disappointed in this than Axl being so late that half the venue/s went home. Which was also really bad. 

The UK fan base rightfully felt totally pissed off by it all and it was another huge negative thing for Axl here, totally his own doing and well deserved. I've seen other UK posters on here who went to the same shows as me say the same things. 

It was so bad that Bumblefoot posted on another forum about it trying to deny any of the band wanted the models at the show, that's it's the promoters who brought them in. He tried to reach out, but damage done. 

It makes me think that kind of shit is what he means in his latest interview when he said he wouldn't go to see GnR because he's seen too much and knows what goes on backstage. 

I had dinner with a friend recently who worked for a modeling agency (management side) in Los Angeles for the last ten years. We got on the subject of bands paying to have models at their gigs and she had some interesting stuff to say about it. Essentially it is a way for promoters/management to "vet" the girls that go backstage and circumvent the traditional "groupie scene." The biggest thing is that the models they send are 18+. That's why they aren't allowed +1's. I asked if it didn't stink for the band to be surrounded by girls who didn't really care about the music and she laughed and said "only if they get caught." As long as the girls are young and hot it doesn't matter and they get to put a bunch of good lookin' girls on the jumbo-tron and have them prominently displayed in their videos. And it works well for management because they would much rather have girls there that are enjoying a free concert and free booze and maybe getting a picture with an old crusty rockstar than a girl that was going to create a scene in any way for the band or for management. They want the girls to have an "above it all" attitude because it keeps the, uh, interaction with the band a little more casual. The girls know that they are there because of their place of business and their reputations are on the line. Most times they have signed NDA's. And the models get a little professional boost by being seen with the band. Apparently, it happens primarily with older bands because they are both more corporatized, and used to having a backstage "scene." I'm still side-eyeing the arrangement but it's tidy little transaction. Meant to do away with this grossness:

Or any grossness that happened to be 16 years old.